THE HALTING PROBLEM - PROOF. Review  What makes a problem decidable?  3 properties of an efficient algorithm?  What is the meaning of “complete”, “mechanistic”,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Formal Models of Computation Part III Computability & Complexity
Advertisements

CS 461 – Nov. 9 Chomsky hierarchy of language classes –Review –Let’s find a language outside the TM world! –Hints: languages and TM are countable, but.
Turing -Recognizable vs. -Decidable
1 CSC3130 Formal Languages and Automata Theory Tutorial 9 Undecidable Problem KN Hung SHB 1026.
Decidable A problem P is decidable if it can be solved by a Turing machine T that always halt. (We say that P has an effective algorithm.) Note that the.
1 Section 14.1 Computability Some problems cannot be solved by any machine/algorithm. To prove such statements we need to effectively describe all possible.
Computability and Complexity 5-1 Classifying Problems Computability and Complexity Andrei Bulatov.
1 Introduction to Computability Theory Lecture15: Reductions Prof. Amos Israeli.
1 Introduction to Computability Theory Lecture12: Reductions Prof. Amos Israeli.
Reducibility Sipser 5.1 (pages ). CS 311 Fall Reducibility.
Reducibility Sipser 5.1 (pages ).
Prof. Busch - LSU1 Decidable Languages. Prof. Busch - LSU2 Recall that: A language is Turing-Acceptable if there is a Turing machine that accepts Also.
Fall 2004COMP 3351 Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages.
FORMAL LANGUAGES, AUTOMATA AND COMPUTABILITY
Fall 2003Costas Busch - RPI1 Decidability. Fall 2003Costas Busch - RPI2 Recall: A language is decidable (recursive), if there is a Turing machine (decider)
Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages
1 The Chomsky Hierarchy. 2 Unrestricted Grammars: Rules have form String of variables and terminals String of variables and terminals.
Fall 2004COMP 3351 The Chomsky Hierarchy. Fall 2004COMP 3352 Non-recursively enumerable Recursively-enumerable Recursive Context-sensitive Context-free.
Fall 2004COMP 3351 Reducibility. Fall 2004COMP 3352 Problem is reduced to problem If we can solve problem then we can solve problem.
CS Master – Introduction to the Theory of Computation Jan Maluszynski - HT Lecture 6 Decidability Jan Maluszynski, IDA, 2007
Linear Bounded Automata LBAs
Homework #9 Solutions.
Automata & Formal Languages, Feodor F. Dragan, Kent State University 1 CHAPTER 5 Reducibility Contents Undecidable Problems from Language Theory.
Courtesy Costas Busch - RPI1 Reducibility. Courtesy Costas Busch - RPI2 Problem is reduced to problem If we can solve problem then we can solve problem.
1 CSE 417: Algorithms and Computational Complexity Winter 2001 Lecture 18 Instructor: Paul Beame.
Fall 2006Costas Busch - RPI1 Undecidable Problems (unsolvable problems)
Prof. Busch - LSU1 Undecidable Problems (unsolvable problems)
Prof. Busch - LSU1 Reductions. Prof. Busch - LSU2 Problem is reduced to problem If we can solve problem then we can solve problem.
1 Reducibility. 2 Problem is reduced to problem If we can solve problem then we can solve problem.
CSE 105 Theory of Computation Alexander Tsiatas Spring 2012 Theory of Computation Lecture Slides by Alexander Tsiatas is licensed under a Creative Commons.
The Halting Problem – Undecidable Languages Lecture 31 Section 4.2 Wed, Oct 31, 2007.
 2005 SDU Lecture13 Reducibility — A methodology for proving un- decidability.
CS 461 – Nov. 7 Decidability concepts –Countable = can number the elements  –Uncountable = numbering scheme impossible  –A TM undecidable –Language classes.
Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages
Donghyun (David) Kim Department of Mathematics and Computer Science North Carolina Central University 1 Chapter 4 Decidability Some slides are in courtesy.
1 The Chomsky Hierarchy. 2 Unrestricted Grammars: Productions String of variables and terminals String of variables and terminals.
Undecidability and The Halting Problem
Chapter 9 Turing Machines What would happen if we change the stack in Pushdown Automata into some other storage device? Truing Machines, which maintains.
Turing Machines- Cont. Theory of Computation Lecture 11 Tasneem Ghnaimat.
Costas Busch - RPI1 Decidability. Costas Busch - RPI2 Another famous undecidable problem: The halting problem.
1 Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages.
Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages. Definition: A language is recursively enumerable if some Turing machine accepts it.
Decidability.
Chapters 11 and 12 Decision Problems and Undecidability.
Recursively Enumerable Languages
Theory of Computability
Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages
CSCI 2670 Introduction to Theory of Computing
Busch Complexity Lectures: Reductions
Linear Bounded Automata LBAs
Reductions.
Undecidable Problems Costas Busch - LSU.
Reductions Costas Busch - LSU.
LIMITS OF ALGORITHMIC COMPUTATION
Busch Complexity Lectures: Undecidable Problems (unsolvable problems)
Undecidable Problems (unsolvable problems)
CSCI 2670 Introduction to Theory of Computing
Decidable Languages Costas Busch - LSU.
Decidability and Undecidability
Turing acceptable languages and Enumerators
Undecidable problems:
Halting Problem.
Proposed in Turing’s 1936 paper
More undecidable languages
Theory of Computability
Theory of Computability
More undecidable languages
CSCI 2670 Introduction to Theory of Computing
Theory of Computability
Automata, Grammars and Languages
Presentation transcript:

THE HALTING PROBLEM - PROOF

Review  What makes a problem decidable?  3 properties of an efficient algorithm?  What is the meaning of “complete”, “mechanistic”, and “deterministic”?  Is the Halting Problem decidable/undecidable?  How would you define the Universal Turing Machine?

Halting problem is undecidable Proof  Proof by contradiction  Assume that there is a TM H that solves the halting problem  The computation of H can be depicted as follows: H R(M)w Accept Reject M halts with input w M does not halt with input w

Halting problem is undecidable Proof  We modify H to construct a new TM H’, which behaves very much as H: The computations of H’ are the same as H, except that H’ loops indefinitely whenever H terminates in an accepting state, i.e., whenever H halts on input w, and halts otherwise H’ R(M)w Loop Halt M halts with input w M does not halt with input w

Halting problem is undecidable Proof  H’ is combined with a copy machine to construct a new TM D: The input to D is a TM representation R(M) A computation of D begins with copying the string R(M) to yield R(M)R(M) The computation continues by running H’ on R(M)R(M) H’ R(M) Loop Halt R(M) Copy M halts with input R(M) M does not halt with input R(M) D

Halting problem is undecidable Proof  Consider a computation of D with input R(D): The input to D is the representation to any arbitrary TM H’ R(D) Loop Halt R(D) Copy D halts with input R(D) D does not halt with input R(D) D  Examining the preceding computation, we see that: D halt on input R(D) iff D does not halt on input R(D), which is a contradiction Therefore, the original assumption is wrong and the halting problem is undecidable